Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Nov 2016 14:55:54 +0100 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [RFC v3 1/6] Track the active utilisation |
| |
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 04:06:33PM +0200, Luca Abeni wrote:
> @@ -498,6 +514,8 @@ static void update_dl_entity(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, > struct dl_rq *dl_rq = dl_rq_of_se(dl_se); > struct rq *rq = rq_of_dl_rq(dl_rq); > > + add_running_bw(dl_se, dl_rq); > + > if (dl_time_before(dl_se->deadline, rq_clock(rq)) || > dl_entity_overflow(dl_se, pi_se, rq_clock(rq))) { > dl_se->deadline = rq_clock(rq) + pi_se->dl_deadline; > @@ -947,14 +965,19 @@ static void enqueue_task_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags) > return; > } > > + if (p->on_rq == TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING) > + add_running_bw(&p->dl, &rq->dl); > + > /* > * If p is throttled, we do nothing. In fact, if it exhausted > * its budget it needs a replenishment and, since it now is on > * its rq, the bandwidth timer callback (which clearly has not > * run yet) will take care of this. > */ > - if (p->dl.dl_throttled && !(flags & ENQUEUE_REPLENISH)) > + if (p->dl.dl_throttled && !(flags & ENQUEUE_REPLENISH)) { > + add_running_bw(&p->dl, &rq->dl); > return; > + } > > enqueue_dl_entity(&p->dl, pi_se, flags); >
I realize the enqueue path is a bit of a maze, but this hurts my head.
Isn't there anything we can do to streamline this a bit?
Maybe move the add_running_bw() from update_dl_entity() to the ENQUEUE_WAKEUP branch in enqueue_dl_entity()? Because that's what you really want, isn't it? Its not actually related to recomputing the absolute deadline.
> @@ -972,6 +995,12 @@ static void dequeue_task_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags) > { > update_curr_dl(rq); > __dequeue_task_dl(rq, p, flags); > + > + if (p->on_rq == TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING) > + sub_running_bw(&p->dl, &rq->dl); > + > + if (flags & DEQUEUE_SLEEP) > + sub_running_bw(&p->dl, &rq->dl); > }
We could look at adding more enqueue/dequeue flags to streamline this a bit, bit lets not do that now.
| |